Should the Angels bring back Andrelton Simmons?

As the season nears the end for the Angels, discussions are ramping up about where the club goes from here.

Aside from the obvious goal of “getting better”, there are some clear questions the Angels will have to answer. Who is going to be the general manager following the season? Where and how are they going to acquire more impact pitching? How will they add immediate talent to make the most of Mike Trout and Anthony Rendon’s primes? What about a Dylan Bundy extension? In addition to these questions, the Angels will have to decide what to do with impending free agent Andrelton Simmons.

Simmons is in his fifth and final year with the Angels before his current contract ends. Simmons has been the best non-Trout Angels player during his five years with the club. In that time, Simmons had provided nearly league-average offense (97 wRC+) along with his elite defense at the shortstop position. The production, however, has tapered off after a near-elite-level stretch from 2017-2018 (10.4 fWAR and 105 wRC+). Multiple ankle injuries, significant time on the Injured List, and a decline in offensive production the past two years (2.1 WAR and 85 wRC+) have reduced his value. Add in the fact that he just turned 31 years old on Friday and there are reasons to be skeptical about bringing Simmons back.

That said, there is a higher floor because of the defense and Simmons may have played himself out of a bigger deal (not to mention the uncertainty around free agency during a pandemic and economic crisis). Simmons also could be an obvious candidate for a qualifying offer given the concerns about his age and recent offensive decline. On Friday, I posted a simple question to Twitter: should the Angels re-sign Andrelton Simmons?

Just over half of the 500+ voters were in favor of bringing Simmons back. I’m posing the same question here at Crashing the Pearly Gates. Are you in favor of re-signing Andrelton Simmons? Below are some of the pros-and-cons of bringing Simmons back.

Pros

  • Simmons has a higher floor because of his defense, making him less of a risk.
  • Simmons likely played himself out of a big contract, making him a potential candidate for a short-term deal.
  • After the Tommy La Stella trade, the Angels have a need for middle infielders.
  • A qualifying offer either brings back Simmons for one year at an elevated price or you get a compensation pick if he leaves.

Cons

  • The Angels have a legitimate in-house shortstop replacement with David Fletcher.
  • A 31-year-old with recent ankle injuries does lead to questions about how quickly he’ll age.
  • The 2022 free agent class features Francisco Lindor, Corey Seager, Trevor Story, Carlos Correa, and Javier Baez. The Angels might be inclined to wait it out.
62 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Angelus
Newbie
1 year ago

Absolutely re-sign him. Yes.

FungoAle
Super Member
1 year ago

If we are stuck next year with Rengifo or Barrera at 2nd, oh yes…dear god, please bring back SIMBA!

Warfarin
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  FungoAle

Rengifo is only 23 and he had a delayed start to this season. He has shown good plate discipline in the minors – I would not count him out just yet.

GrandpaBaseball
Super Member
1 year ago

Why is it so dang difficult to see that Simba is a good deal for this team to invest in? lf the Angels think that any of those big names are worth signing it will come in at about 25 to 30 mil per yr. If we resign Simba for 10 to 12 mil per yr we then have the defense to help our pitching and we cover 2b with a potential GG and lead off hitter. Pitching is the tough part here, but at need is also a catcher. Don’t let go of someone like Simba so your 2b will be Renny. Signing Simba is much smarter a move than signing a younger guy for more money and then you won’t money for some pitching. The defense provided by Simba and Fletch everyday comes up with the extra outs that won’t be there if you have Fletch and any regular flieding 2b. It is not just the errors, but the plays that don’t happen that will cost our pitchers. This year do you see the plays not being made in the OF because of weak defense, well for years we have weak defense at 2b unless Fletch is in. Weak defense at 3b and catcher through the years has cost us. Sign Simba and save money.

gitchogritchoffmypettis
Super Member

No matter what the FO does with Simmons they are wrong and I am outraged. I still say stop signing players all together and put all our money into a lab where we can grow young pitchers like dinosaurs at Jurassic Park but with awesome spin rate and biting curve balls.

Last edited 1 year ago by gitchogritchoffmypettis
2002heaven
Trusted Member
1 year ago

wouldn’t “Westworld” be a better place?

GrandpaBaseball
Super Member
1 year ago

If resigned that means the money spent on one of the Big Names coming up after ’21 could go to pitching. The next big contract coming up should be on a catcher. Our focus should be on pitching. Simba belongs here and we will be fine.A 4 year 10mil per is a fair deal.

John Henry Weitzel
Editor
Super Member
1 year ago

Simba makes pitchers better and this team needs as much as that as possible. Besides if Fletcher is at SS that means 2B becomes an offenseive and defensive issue.

Long term no. Maybe a one year deal or a qo. He wants to stay so maybe he pulls a Weaver on us. People say spend on pitching. And I agree. Issue is, the team is more than one away and the money saved from not paying simba won’t be enough.

Arte may be pushing for a stop gap for the next FA market the year after. So a one year deal. It will also give enough time to get Paris to have time to get ready.

I know that the goal is to just throw all of the money at pitching but I am not looking forward to a second base of Rengifo and Franklin.

Simba has been the second most valuable player that has debuted in 2012. More than anyone but Machado (for BR).

This team already has issues defensively with Upton in LF. Simba has kept that from being worse.

Fletcher is great. Maybe he is the SS of the future and a 2B can be found in the system somewhere that isn’t terrible.

But this offseason won’t see a lot of good pitchers come through that door. Arte isn’t gonna throw money around like that.

Maybe one guy. If Arte sees him as billboard material. But this FA class will be super competitive.

Angels will have an easier time trading for pitching. And even then that is difficult.

AngelsRcrackerjack
Newbie
1 year ago

If Simmons is traded for pitching, and Fletcher moved to short, that leaves the right side of the infield as:

Walsh .184 / .248 / .330
Thaiss .210 / .291 / .408
Barreto .173 / .341 / .542
Rengifo .225 / .315 / .340
Pujols – better than all of the above

But I’m sure that Eppler is much better at finding cheap infielders than cheap (and not-so-cheap) pitchers.

[all stats BaseballReference 162 game average]

Last edited 1 year ago by AngelsRcrackerjack
Turk's Teeth
Editor
Trusted Member
1 year ago

Simmons can’t be traded for pitching. His contract is up.

He can be resigned to a new contract, or offered a qualifying offer. If he accepts, it’s a one year deal at ~18M.

AngelsRcrackerjack
Newbie
1 year ago
Reply to  Turk's Teeth

My bad. “If Simmons is not resigned and the money used for pitching…” {embarrassing}

Last edited 1 year ago by AngelsRcrackerjack
Turk's Teeth
Editor
Trusted Member
1 year ago

OTOH, if he’s offered the QO and accepts, he could be traded mid-season 2021 and the Angels could probably still net a prospect with second-round value. Which to me confirms that offering him the QO is a no-brainer. There’s no obvious SS prospect being blocked by an additional year of Simmons, and not doing it just deprives the team of a shot at another Marsh or Canning tier talent.

matthiasstephan
Trusted Member
1 year ago

I would rather us try to find a deal for Rengifo or Barretto (probably with some of our OF prospects) to get a pitcher back (somewhat like the planned Stripling deal) – that way we deal from ‘strength’. The proposed Adell/Marsh proposed moves would gain us better prospects, but that is risky longer term. Can we count on Upton/Ohtani or one of Thaiss/Walsh competently manning 1B post-Pujols? Otherwise, we need someone there.

FungoAle
Super Member
1 year ago

What a putrid right side of the infield that would be. People should get fired if that is what we are stuck with.

Turk's Teeth
Editor
Trusted Member
1 year ago

I see little downside in offering Simmons a QO. If he delivers 2-3 WAR, he’s paid for the contract, and if he underdelivers the risk is time-limited. If he signs elsewhere, the Angels get a top 75 draft pick.

Andrelton’s defense improves all groundball oriented pitching the team might develop or acquire, so the value isn’t limited to just positional value.

gitchogritchoffmypettis
Super Member
Reply to  Turk's Teeth

This. This is wisdom. I am actually even OK with QOing him, and then offering him something like 3/36m or something. Let him bridge the time it will take to figure out if Jackson, Paris or Vera etc are legit.

DMAGZ13
Trusted Member
1 year ago

No you can’t just build up a winner by adding up WAR. I think Simmons is an example of the crack in the code that proves this. Yes he’s steady but I rather have a 2-war 4th starter than a 3.5 war SS that gets it primarily on D. I think it’s easier for us to find a cheap replacement level 2B than a good, cheap starter or bullpen piece based on our history. Use the money for pitching.

if only our player development was any good because next season Jam Jones should have emerged.

Last edited 1 year ago by DMAGZ13
H.T. Ennis
Admin
Super Member
1 year ago
Reply to  DMAGZ13

Is your issue with “primarily on D” that you don’t trust how defensive metrics factor into WAR?

DMAGZ13
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  H.T. Ennis

Maybe? I feel like I’d rather have a more pitchers that stop the ball from being hit than defensive players who accumulate runs saved bases in the number of opportunities that come their way. Maybe I totally don’t understand this well, but I have a math question. suppose you have shitty pitchers who give up hit balls all over the place. Doesn’t that give your defenders more opportunities to “save runs” ? You could still have an elite defender who gets to more balls than another replacement player could but the sheer number of batted balls means stuff is still going to get by and lead to runs?
Is there an adjustment factored into this?

Also this year, the disparity between fangraphs and bR war is strong with Trout primarily I think due to his defensive war.

Last edited 1 year ago by DMAGZ13
matthiasstephan
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  DMAGZ13

It is true, Baseball Reference and Fangraphs use different metrics for D – but that isn’t a reason to discount the contribution of defense. Simba is a great example of value provided (and his listing there on bWAR with how badly they rate Trout, means the value he provides must be even greater).

You are right, a bad pitcher means that the D can only do so much. Question is, can we acquire enough better pitchers to mitigate the loss in D that letting Simba walk would imply (worse D at 2B, at least, presuming that Fletch covers everywhere as well as Simba (which as good as Fletch has been, still isn’t the proposed metric).

DMAGZ13
Trusted Member
1 year ago

So that’s my thought too. I definitely acknowledge his defense being valuable. But suppose you can replace him with O war defense and just replace his money allocation to two pitchers the give you equal value to that of his war. Seems easier to to find a 0 war defender off the scrap heap than pitchers that can do that?

H.T. Ennis
Admin
Super Member
1 year ago
Reply to  DMAGZ13

Yes, it does, and if they make all the plays their UZR should go up. However, the more groundballs one gets, the more likely an error will eventually come. I think UZR is evaluated fairly for what we know because not everyone makes all the plays. If fielders routinely only made a couple errors a season, then your point would be more intriguing and subject to debate.

Turk's Teeth
Editor
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  DMAGZ13

As long as we’re honest with ourselves in recognizing that the “2 WAR 4th starter path” has largely been the only starting pitcher path Eppler has pursued for five years: Teheran, Cahill, Harvey, Nolasco, Chacín, Chavez, Peters, Stratton, Sandoval.

Needless to say, it hasn’t worked. In roughly ten tries, the only pitcher who has outperformed expectations is Bundy, and Felix Peña, who has shown better out of the bullpen than in the rotation to date.

DMAGZ13
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Turk's Teeth

Does WAR itself take into consideration the supply of replacement level payers at each position? Like are there more replacement level SS than replacement level pitchers that are available? Because I would think that the term replacement means replace ? It just seems that the value of a 2 war is higher since we can’t find them on the market. If you have to trade or pay more than it’s kind of like our housing situation. It may not really appraise that high but every house is going 60-70 over listing.

Last edited 1 year ago by DMAGZ13
gitchogritchoffmypettis
Super Member
Reply to  Turk's Teeth

I don’t think an investment in Simba will be what stops us from getting a really good pitcher. If one comes available he will cost so much we will just have to blow past our payroll budget with or without him. That is IF anyone comes available and IF they are willing to sign here instead of the Yankees or what ever team is close to their home. That’s a lot of ifs to worry about before we decide to eject a pretty good SS.

He wants to be here. With Semein, Story and Lindor coming on the market soon his contract demands shouldn’t be too crazy. If they aren’t I’d keep him even longer than one year.

Eric_in_Portland
Super Member
1 year ago

It’s all on Arte’s head. Maintaining a hard line on spending means we’re never getting good pitching. For all we know Bundy is this year’s Bridwell. All we can afford are “maybes”. Maybe Harvey will pitch well, maybe Cahill will, maybe Andriese will, maybe Teheran will. If we don’t sign Simba then we can afford one, and only one, mid tier starter and only if we outbid other clubs. And Arte doesn’t like to be bidding, even though that’s the actual nature of free agency. He likes to offer, take it or leave it. At least that’s my impression.

Until he loosens the budget we’re not getting top pitching. If he does open up a bit we can sign pitchers and re-sign Simba.

matthiasstephan
Trusted Member
1 year ago

Bundy has a far better track record than Bridwell. He wasn’t trade for cash considerations (like Bridwell) and had pitched 160+ innings for several years. It isn’t a good comparison. Trading for Bundy is exactly the way we can build without having to spend big in free agency (what we have been asked to do, right?).

Are we that close to a limit that we can’t keep Simba and go get a pitcher? Is that the consensus, we need to cut someone to spend on pitching? Teheran’s salary is the same as Simba’s (9M) which is less than the combined Castro, Goodwin, La Stella yearly haul. Use that money for another pitcher, no?.

gitchogritchoffmypettis
Super Member

Please, tell me more about this hard line on spending. It sounds interesting.

2002heaven
Trusted Member
1 year ago

Not in the mood for just a mere GG fielding shortstop anymore, this is the 2020’s now, not the 1950’s with Pee Wee Reese.
This trend to big tall powerful SS’s started in the 80’s, but again we just don’t seem to get the memo for some reason. Oh I get it Franklin Barreto gonna be that guy…..LMFAO!!! I get it that Roberto Baldoquín and Kevin Maitan were both bombs, but the next GM has to be a Grady Fuson kind of guy. If we can’t seem to scout and develop our own Cal Ripken kind of guy then we should trade for somebody else’s then ( Brandon Marsh and Dylan Bundy pack your bags ).

Jeff Joiner
Editor
Super Member
1 year ago

Maybe but let free agency play out first. With Fletcher in the fold the Angels gage the option of shopping for a short stop or second baseman. Between those two lists and what figures to be a relatively cool market, there’s enough talent available to find a bargain.

2002heaven
Trusted Member
1 year ago

comment image
Arte Moreno? 😆  😆 
(Mr Potter…..It’s A Wonderful Life.)

Last edited 1 year ago by 2002heaven
H.T. Ennis
Admin
Super Member
1 year ago

I say don’t give him the QO, but look to re-sign him around 12 million AAV. We’re probably not going to sign a big name SP anyway, so might as well use some money and bring him back =)

2002heaven
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  H.T. Ennis

If Eppler’s still around we might get 10 pitchers from a EDD office in Fresno.

Greatjake
Member
1 year ago

I absolutely love Simba. He’s a joy to watch in the field and more often than not he does the right thing with the bat. Sublime glove + contact bat is the recipe we need to surround this core with.

That being said it all comes down to $$. If he’s willing to consider 2-3yrs at around $10-12m AAV then I’d be happy to have him back. There aren’t many FA comps for a 31yr old SS wizard with an injury history and a light bat. Nick Ahmed got 4/$32m at 29yrs old…

For the record I think he accepts a QO. Pujols $$ is off the table after 2021. Extending Bundy and/or Heaney is still a priority but we have all of next season to negotiate.

Last edited 1 year ago by Greatjake
Warfarin
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Greatjake

I would say under virtually no circumstances should we re-sign Simmons, simply because we need to invest as much money into pitching as possible.

We probably have, roughly, 15-20mil total to spend in free agency, if that.

If we give Simmons a 10mil AAV deal, that leaves basically no room to invest in pitching.

Hate to say it, but we have to punt on Simmons. While Pujols’ deal expires after next year and Upton the year thereafter, we’ll likely need to replace those deals with other big deals for pitching, given the lack of pitching talent in our organization. We also have some young guys who will be getting decent raises in arbitration over the coming years.

Extending either Bundy or Heaney will likely give us a 15-20 mil AAV deal on our books, and we clearly need another legit SP beyond one of those two, and that’ll likely cost another 20mil+ AAV as well.

Detmers and Rodriguez can potentially help down the line, and hopefully one or two of Barria, Sandoval, and Suarez can be serviceable, but our pitching pipeline is rather dry.

Last edited 1 year ago by Warfarin
Greatjake
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Warfarin

Bundy and Heaney are tough to gauge but I think maybe the Kyle Hendricks (4/$55m) and Sonny Gray (3/$30.5m) contracts are good comps to aim for. Both were signed in 2019 at the players age 29 season. Bundy is going to be 28 and Heaney 30. Those are both under $15-20M AAV. In fact, they’d essentially replace Albert’s commitment.

We agree that pitching is the priority. I’m in the camp that aquiring arms through trade > aquiring arms through free agency. Pay for a slightly risky rotation arm at an affordable price (Paxton or Ray?) but add the significant arm through trade.

Last edited 1 year ago by Greatjake
Warfarin
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Greatjake

My concern though is – what trade pieces do we really have to use to acquire that kind of SP?

The only area of strength we have is OF, so we’d likely need to trade one of Adell/Marsh/Adams.

I do like Jeff’s idea of the Adell for Manning or Mize swap. It would sting to trade Adell, but Manning/Mize are both SP2 type prospects with a possible chance of SP1, which we sorely need.

So in that regard, I’d be down with a swap like that, then extending Bundy. Manning/Bundy/Detmers should make a nice future core, and if Ohtani can return and show his ace-like potential, then we suddenly have an area of significant strength.

Lots of hopes and wishes in this projection, but it’s possible.

Greatjake
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Warfarin

We have valuable players to trade (Fletch/Ohtani/Adell/Marsh/Adams/Jackson Paris) but finding a willing dance partner is the trick. I like how we match up with KC and wrote a fan post suggesting a swap between us but who knows. You’re right in saying that it’s a bunch of hopes and wishes

JackFrost
Super Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Greatjake

I’d say Ohtani is off the table, and Fletch is DEFINITELY off the table.

Adell I might consider trading but I would first have to see some production from Marsh at the MLB level to make me believe he could be a productive everyday player, and the pitcher coming back would have to be PROVEN.

I know Mize has potential, but he hasn’t looked all that great for the Tigers thus far. I know it’s a small sample, but he has a 6.61 FIP and has given up 3 HR in 10 IP. I would need to see something a lot better at this level before trading Adell.

Warfarin
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  JackFrost

Ironically Detroit is probably thinking the same thing, as Adell has been one of the worst major leaguers so far this year.

JackFrost
Super Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Warfarin

That’s fine. Fair is fair. Adell looks like he may be turning a corner (fingers crossed). If both he and Mize are playing well that trade could make sense for both teams.

But I think we need to wait and see (both teams really).

Greatjake
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  JackFrost

You have to surrender value to get value in return. We can’t label our good players untouchable and still expect to improve through trade

JackFrost
Super Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Greatjake

There is no way you improve by trading Fletcher. The Padres aren’t going to give you Tatis, and short of getting him you don’t improve your team by trading Fletch — he’s the heart and soul of the team and losing him woukd leave such a big hole that it would not ultimately help us.

And likewise, because of questions surrounding Ohtani you would never get equal value back in return. In short, that would be a trade you could only lose, not win.

Greatjake
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  JackFrost

Agree on Ohtani, disagree on Fletch. I like Fletch alot and don’t have any urge to move him but to suggest we couldn’t improve by trading him is insane. The fact that he’s so beloved by us is evidence that other organizations would covit him. You seem to be suggesting that Fernando Tatis is the only player more valuable than David Fletcher and that’s just silly…

JackFrost
Super Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Greatjake

Well, there are a couple other young, controllable stars; Soto and Acuña.

Or did Acuña already sign a big deal?

You’re probably thinking “hey those guys are like the best young players in the game. Exactly.

That should tell you how much I think of David Fletcher.

You do know that Fletch was leading the AL in hits prior to his injury, right?

More importantly he has already accumulated 1.8 WAR over 35 games. That extrapolates to 7.2 WAR over a 140 game season! I think it is likely Fletch could play 140 out of 162.

Who would you trade Fletch for that would get you 7.2 WAR next year?

Even with a drop-off to say 5 WAR, those 5 WAR players don’t grow on trees. You will not likely get one for Fletch. In short, we need to keep David Fletcher.

Last edited 1 year ago by JackFrost
Greatjake
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  JackFrost

Pure hypothetical: So if the Phillies showed interest and were willing to talk on Aaron Nola or Spencer Howard you’d hang up? What if it’s the Rays and Glasnow or Snell are available? To close your mind because Fletch is on a 7.2 WAR pace and is your favorite player is your right but if someone wants to overpay I think you help them make that mistake.

Last edited 1 year ago by Greatjake
JackFrost
Super Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Greatjake

Well, now you’re saying what I’m saying, which is I don’t trade Fletch unless I get a BETTER player back in return.

Because I feel that Fletch brings so many intangibles to the team (in the same way his idol David Eckstein did) I don’t think you consider trading him for someone that is equal. You’d have to be getting back a CLEARLY better player.

Would I trade Fletch for Juan Soto? I’d hate to see him go but I’d do it in a heartbeat. But my point remains; you should not make ANY trade unless it IMPROVES the team.

I don’t believe in making trades because the GM needs to show the owner that he is actually doing something, or because “making trades is fun!” Though I am sure for you it would be. But that is not a reason to make it.

So, my statement about not trading Fletch is not about his being my “favorite player,” but rather the fact that I don’t think doing so would actually help the team.

And FYI, I don’t think I’d trade Fletcher for either Snell or Nola. Snell has had one great year out of four and Nola has never had a FIP under 3.00 and is epitome of inconsistent. So, no, I wouldn’t.

Last edited 1 year ago by JackFrost
Greatjake
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  JackFrost

Differing opinions make the world go round. I think Fletch is a damn good player and a fun guy to root for. Maybe he’s a perennial 5 win player or maybe he’s David Eckstein.

Charles Sutton
Editor
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Greatjake

I wanted to look at trading Fletcher in my trade deadline piece about the Yankees but his trade value is so high on the simulator it would take Cole plus Severino to be a fair trade according to the simulator. LOL! Not gonna happen. I think we need to thank our lucky stars about Fletcher and just hang on to him.

JackFrost
Super Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Sutton

Totally agree Charles.

Greatjake
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Sutton

If we take BTV valuations as gospel we’d need 2.6 Fletcher’s to get Aaron Nola. Just saying

Fletch is low on the trade totem pole but if we were offered multiple impact arms who are MLB ready I don’t think we can say no

2002heaven
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Warfarin

But by now you should know that no way in hell is Arte gonna pay top dollar for a top shelf pitcher ( Zack Greinke and Gerrit Cole take a bow PLZ! ).
Only way we’re gonna get a guy like those two, is to rent one for half a season like the Dodgers did with Manny Machado. The Astros and RS both traded for their pitching to win in 2017, and 2018 and WE SHOULD DO THE SAME……

gitchogritchoffmypettis
Super Member
Reply to  2002heaven

Arte would have paid Richards, and probably Wheeler, if either had had any intention of signing here.
I still think he’ll throw a big pile of money at a legitimate ace if he can. He just won’t get into a bidding war for Nathan Eovaldi or Bumgardner.

Last edited 1 year ago by gitchogritchoffmypettis
gitchogritchoffmypettis
Super Member
Reply to  Warfarin

Just curious, who are the FA pitchers you’d give 20m a year to? I’m on the fence with just about all of them.

VladimirTrout27
Member
1 year ago
Reply to  Greatjake

I’m all in in Simba. The defense is superb, he hits good contact, doesn’t strike out much. Fletcher solidifies 2B., but moving Fletch to SS leaves a ton if uncertainty to 2B. Robbing Peter to pay Paul. Simba has hit successfully if diff parts in the order. I think $12-14/ yr gets it done for the next 3-4 years. Possibly an overpay but a better risk knowing we’re better with Simba than without next few years while Trout and Rendon are in their prime.

Senator_John_Blutarsky
Super Member

Arte refuses to make the necessary investments to improve the truly weak areas within the franchise. Put Fletcher at SS, let Simmons walk and use the limited payroll money to shore up pitching.

Jim Atkins
Trusted Member
1 year ago

When they didn’t trade him, seemed to me he was in the plans for the future. 2-3 years max, though. Put Fletcher at 2B for the duration.

PatrickNaN
Trusted Member
1 year ago

Depends on what others offer him.

He might be my favorite player, but I wouldn’t sign him to anything long term. Defensive shortstops aren’t known for aging well and we’ve already had our share of aging contracts.

If we could do a 2-3 year deal, then sure. Whether we can or not depends on the FA market.

AnAngelsFan
Trusted Member
1 year ago

I think Simmons has played himself back into a potential long-term deal since coming back from his injury. I like extending him a qualifying offer and following up with a short 2-3 year negotiation.

The worst case scenario is Simmons is available to mentor future middle infielders, whether that is Barretto, Jackson, Jones or someone else.

The best case scenario is he continues to provide league average offense with above-average defense.

2002heaven
Trusted Member
1 year ago
Reply to  AnAngelsFan

Ugh!!!
So you’re gonna put trust into anybody Eppler drafted? Billy Eppler’s players are all suspects until they prove otherwise.
We don’t have 4 straight losing seasons and #5 staring us in the face for nothing plus a #25 rated farm system too after 4 straight seasons.